The Antibody Society

the official website of the antibody society

An international non-profit supporting antibody-related research and development.

You are here: Home / Archives for antibody discovery

Career Shorts Ep 2 – Dr Nimish Gera

by

After the launch of our new Career Shorts series last week, we are proud to release our second episode with Dr Nimish Gera, Head of Biologics at Mythic Therapeutics! Check out our new episode via our new YouTube channel using the link below.

Career Shorts Ep 2: https://youtu.be/kOpuBxNdS5A

 

Our previous episode (Ep 1 with Dr Li Zhou): https://youtu.be/Y9xtGRLQaSM
Career shorts webpage: https://www.antibodysociety.org/career-shorts/

About Career shorts:

In this series, we talk to scientists and individuals working within the world of antibodies about the experiences that have shaped their careers and have got them to where they are today. Our goal by sharing their experiences and advice is to empower the next generation of scientists and leaders working in this field and beyond to make confident and empowered decisions.

Career Shorts

by

The Antibody Society is proud to present Career Shorts!

In this series, we talk to scientists and individuals working within the world of antibodies about the experiences that have shaped their careers and have got them to where they are today. Our goal by sharing their experiences and advice is to empower the next generation of scientists and leaders working in this field and beyond to make confident and empowered decisions.

We kick off our first episode by talking to Dr Li Zhou, principle scientist at AbbVie. This episode and more will be made accessible via our new YouTube channel. Check out the full interview in the link below and stay tuned for more exciting releases!

 

Career Shorts Ep 1: Dr Li Zhou: https://youtu.be/Y9xtGRLQaSM
Career shorts webpage: https://www.antibodysociety.org/career-shorts/

Learn about ImmunoPrecise Antibodies’ efforts to stay ahead of the virus on June 17!

by

Join us on Thursday June 17, 8am PT/ 11am ET / 5pm CET for

 

 

Staying ahead of the virus: From a multispecies discovery strategy to highly efficacious, clinically suitable multi-antibody cocktails targeting SARS-CoV-2.

featuring:

Ilse Roodink, PhD, Scientific Director, ImmunoPrecise Antibodies Europe and
Debby Kruijsen, PhD, General Manager, ImmunoPrecise Antibodies Europe

Whereas vaccines significantly contribute to halting transmission of SARS-CoV-2, they are not universally effective. Therapeutic antibodies can fill this gap to efficiently combat SARS-CoV-2. Obviously, long-lasting efficacy of anti-viral approaches heavily depends on the ability to protect against virus variants. As a multi-targeting strategy reduces the risk of mutagenic escape, we have isolated a diversified pool of anti-spike protein antibodies by leveraging our expertise to generate antibody libraries across multiple discovery platforms in different species, to eventually formulate a sensible therapeutic cocktail. A broad range of in vitro characterizations was applied to gain early insight into the epitope landscape and functional characteristics as well as developability profiles. This comprehensive, high-throughput characterization of the obtained lead candidate pool guided the rational combination of high value antibodies into multi-membered cocktails that unlock synergistic effects, significantly boosting neutralization potency in vitro.

To accelerate further clinical development of our prioritized antibody cocktails, 2 individual components were subjected to in silico modeling-guided light molecular optimization to minimize liabilities, while in parallel, in vivo efficacy evaluation in a hamster challenge model validated efficient prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection following administration of our prioritized antibody cocktails. Although we anticipate that a multi-targeting strategy is the best solution to reduce mutagenic risk escape, we continuously analyze binding of the antibodies of our lead pool for reactivity towards emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants empirically. To date, we screened our prioritized antibody cocktails towards spike protein of the S. African (B.1.351 lineage), Brazilian (P.1 lineage), UK (B.1.1.7 lineage), New York (B.1.526 lineage) and Californian (B.1.429 lineage) strains and confirmed retained binding. Our pandemic preparedness is further strengthened by the readily accessible, diverse pool of antibodies that we generated, which provides enormous possibilities for plug-and-play cocktails to address future SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Click here to register for this free event!

Funding the Development of Antibody Innovations: Part 3: Crossover Investors

by

By Tom Burt (Partner, Sofinnova Partners) & Nick Hutchinson (BSG Lead, Mammalian Cell Culture, FUJIFILM Diosynth Biotechnologies)

The development of antibody therapeutics requires large amounts of cash to sustain nascent companies while they demonstrate the safety and efficacy of their products in clinical trials. It is estimated that it takes over a billion dollars to bring an antibody therapeutic to market. In our last post (1) we described how biotech firms use pre-seed and seed funding to get their ideas off the ground, but following these, they typically rely on VCs for their next rounds of finance. The first round of VC funding or Series A funding can run into tens of millions of dollars.

Ori Biotech, a company developing a manufacturing platform for cell and gene therapies, raised $30 million of additional funds from a group of VCs, having initially raised $10 million in seed funding. The team believe the Series A funding is sufficient to develop a minimum viable product, the earliest version of the technology that can be released to the first customers for them to provide feedback and allow subsequent improvement cycles.

In an interview published in March 2021, Ori Biotech CEO, Jason Foster, advised start-up companies seeking Series A investment to start by developing a comprehensive understanding of the market for the technology and how to pitch effectively to potential investors. Secondly, he recommended firms target the right investors, as different investors specialize in different sectors and investment stages. Finally, he emphasized that fundraising is a full-time job, so companies should ensure they have sufficient support and time allocated to this critical activity (2).

Series B Venture Capital funding

AgomAb, is a Belgium start-up that is working on regenerative pathway modulators in inflammatory, metabolic and fibrotic diseases. It has raised two rounds of VC funding. Scientists at the company have drawn upon research from the 1990s that suggested hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and the HGF-MET pathway might have regenerative potential. Founded in 2017, the company raised $25 million in 2019 in a Series A funding round, which it used to perform research on a set of full and partial MET agonists.  These had been discovered through a partnership with argenx, which gave AgomAb access to the SIMPLE antibodyTM technology platform that raises antibodies with variable regions derived from the immune systems of ‘outbred’ llamas.

AgomAb’s Series A funding allowed it to progress its lead antibody candidate, AGMB-101, into Investigational New Drug-enabling toxicology studies, but the company needed additional funding to enter the clinic and so raised a further $74 million in Series B funding. Significantly, AgomAb considers that AGMB-101 could be efficacious in a range of disorders and represent a pipeline-in-a-product; however, it is also seeking to expand its pipeline beyond this lead candidate (3).

So, what’s the difference between Series A and Series B funding? Tom Burt of Sofinnova Partners points out, “The AgomAb example highlights that the amount of capital raised in Series B is larger, which in this case this is helpful because of the high costs of clinical development activities, and that the scope of what the business must achieve has evolved. In many instances, the two rounds of funding might seem similar and represent a continuum, with the Series B round being led by the same Series A investors. Redmile and Cormorant, two well-known US-based crossover funds, led this funding round.”

“Crossover investors can be considered as VCs that invest in promising companies that have the near-term potential to list their shares on a stock exchange in a financing round known as an Initial Public Offering [IPO]. They are a relatively new addition to the venture capital continuum. While a crossover investor will still need to be convinced of the potential in the company’s pipeline, they also have a focus on the public markets,” he says.

Cross-over investors can be more flexible around the clinical stage of development and can finance preclinical to Phase 3 clinical-stage companies if they believe that sufficient appetite exists amongst public market investors for the IPO candidate. Typically, the crossover investor[s] will seek to raise a significant amount of funds in a Series B [and sometimes Series A round] with the committed intention of supporting any IPO round alongside traditional institutional investors.

In our final post of this 4-part series, we will look at the final stages of the financing cycle, including how crossover investing has altered valuations of early-stage biotech companies. We’ll examine the case of EpiMab and discuss how investors in  a company like this might look to exit and generate a return on their investments.

We hope you’ll join us next week for the final post in this series, Exit Strategies for Investors in Antibodies.

(1)    Burt T. & Hutchinson N. (2021). Funding the Development of Antibody Innovations. Part 2: Business Angels and Venture Capitalists.

(2)    Finerva (2021). Ori Biotech – Fundraising & Growth. March 12, 2021.

(3)    Taylor, P. T. (2021) AgromAb raises $74M to develop regenerative pathway modulators. Fierce Biotech. March 10, 2021.

Funding the Development of Antibody Innovations, Part 2: Business Angels and Venture Capitalists

by

By Tom Burt (Partner, Sofinnova Partners) & Nick Hutchinson (BSG Lead, Mammalian Cell Culture, FUJIFILM Diosynth Biotechnologies)

Antibody scientists with exciting technologies typically require substantial amounts of capital to develop their ideas and turn them into products that can be marketed. In the case of therapeutic antibodies, this can take many years and cost millions if not billions of dollars. In our first post on raising finance to support antibody innovations, we described why scientists are excited about raising finance at the current time (1). In this second post, we explore possible sources of funding for newly formed antibody companies at the very beginning of the funding cycle.

Venture capitalist (VCs) firms have traditionally been significant sources of funding for start-up biotech companies because they are undeterred by the risk that an individual company may not generate a return due to the challenges of product development in this sector. In order to generate a return on their investments, VCs back numerous start-ups in the hope that a minority will win big. However, for most scientists attempting to commercialize the fruits of their research labors, VCs are probably not the first port of call when attempting to raise funds. Biotech start-ups commonly rely on pre-seed funding in the form of government grants, bank loans, technology transfer funding from universities and even family or friends.

Business Angels are also sources of early finance. These are often individual, or syndicates of wealthy, private individuals that invest their own money in sectors that they know and understand. They typically make smaller investments than VC, usually up to $2 million, but small companies can often obtain the funds sooner. Angel investors are often interested in being involved in the project and are able to provide mentoring and access to useful networks in addition to the funding they bring.

Start-up biotechs use this seed funding to protect their intellectual property and progress their idea sufficiently such that VCs or other partners will become interested in the technology. Fortunately, in the past few years the cost of research infrastructure has gone down, allowing start-up companies to make greater progress with their ideas prior to reaching out to the VC community. Low rent lab-space is now more commonly available, suppliers provide more convenient ways to access equipment, and entrepreneurial scientists can outsource more routine studies and testing to contract research organizations.

Antiverse, a UK-based biotech start-up, recently announced it had raised £1.4 million [US$2m] to fund the development of its Artificial Intelligence-powered antibody discovery technology for accelerating antibody drug development by accurately predicting antibody-antigen binding. The company believes their platform will enable the development of antibody drugs for difficult targets associated with cancer, and heart and lung diseases. It will use the money to further develop the platform, to build a new laboratory in Cardiff, Wales, and to recruit specialist machine-learning engineers, laboratory scientists and structural biologists. The funding was raised from The Development Bank of Wales and a syndicate of Angel Investors.

While the levels of pre-seeding funding might not match that provided by VCs, some founding scientists see a benefit in taking maximum advantage of investments that allow them to retain greater control.

Tom Burt of Sofinnova Partners says, “To truly scale a start-up requires quantums of growth capital that can really only feasibly be provided by VCs. Beyond the necessary capital, VCs are also helpful to emerging companies in more qualitative ways, given their accumulated experience of financing other similar enterprises. VCs can contribute by attracting talent to Board and Management-level positions who increase the probability of success through sage advice on all areas of development.”

“In addition, the VC’s network can be invaluable in forging connections with potential pharma and biotech partners as well as investors and bankers for assistance with further financings. While the founder can expect some loss of control, VCs are typically minority investors looking to work collegially with other stakeholders to improve outcomes,” he continues.

In our next post, we’ll look at the first two rounds of financing that VCs provide to antibody start-up companies and we’ll introduce the concept of the cross-over fund, a relatively new concept by which VCs invest in promising companies that have the near-term potential to list their shares on a stock exchange.

Look for the third post in the series next week.

(1)    Burt T. & Hutchinson N. Funding the Development of Antibody Innovations. Part 1: Entrepreneurial Antibody Scientists.